[thephyber]

The DOJ states that he admitted he was structuring to bank employees, whereas the article says he admitted it to his employees. Either way, he knew he was avoiding reporting requirements, so he would have been able to figure out that it was a crime. Admitting it to the bank employee was probably what started the legal investigation.

Additionally, there are newer reporting requirements that deal with a change in behavior of deposits/withdrawals, not just a fixed floor of $10k per transaction. I know this has been talked about since at least 9/11.

If I were you, I wouldn't admit on a public website to skirting a law, but I'm not sure that "snapcheck" is a law vs some company's risk-limiting policy.

I generally agree that this seems like a non-crime being prosecuted, but it's the law. Until people stop deferring all safety/security decisions to police and prosecutors (which is why we have such a ridiculously bloated criminal code), we will continue to have laws like this for the nanny state to save us from doing the "wrong" things by keeping us in a nice, safe prison cell for 10 years.